Thread by @SteB777

I want to briefly outline my objection, to early humans, caused the megafauna extinction meme, but most of all, how it is deeply damaging to an understanding of the climate and ecological crisis. Highly misleading, and distorts thinking.
1/🧵

I think most people are familiar with the "overkill hypothesis". This started out, that shortly after humans arrived in the Americas, the megafauna, Mammoths etc, died out, and that this was due to humans overhunting them.

2/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Schu…

This was expanded to other regions of the world, and often used to support the claim, that humans as a species are inherently destructive. That actually, the modern climate and ecological crisis, is just a continuation of the long history of our species.
3/

It is a complete falsehood, and almost a complete inversion of the truth. See my thread linked to below. This is very damaging, because it misleads people to think there is no hope, and the problem is humans, which is totally untrue.

4/threadreaderapp.com/thread/1776184…

The reason this is so damaging, especially when environmentalists, and climate activists, state this falsehood as fact, is that it sends thinking into completely the wrong direction. It makes the situation seem hopeless, because it's just humans.
5/

The reality is entirely different. Human society, has only become unsustainable, and us heading in a globally suicidal direction, in the last several hundred years. It was not a direction human society was heading in, for most of human existence.
6/

Modern humans, Homo sapiens, have been around for 2-300,000 years, and our close ancestors, very similar, for much longer. For most of that time, humans lived in egalitarian societies, where resources were shared equally, and the natural systems, that keep us alive, revered.
7/

This is not a romantic vision, life was tough at times, but this was the general pattern of society. There were no all powerful rulers exploiting everyone, and generally, Mother Earth was revered. It was thought bad and stupid to damage the natural systems, which sustain us.
8/

When European colonists, first arrived in the Americas, Australia, Africa, there was massive and abundant biodiversity, great herds of wild animals, that no long exist. It's clear that the culture of the European colonists, was very damaging.
9/

This overkill hypothesis, is used to undermine the evidence of our own 2 eyes, and to say, no, it wasn't just these European colonists, Native Americans were just as bad, because they wiped out the megafauna, when they got into the Americas. This simply isn't true.
10/

Even if the first humans to get into the Americas, had wiped out the megafauna as claimed, the fact remains that when European colonists first arrived in the Americas, there was a large Native American population, and abundant biodiversity.
11/

Where are the huge herds of Bison, which once roamed the plains? The gigantic flocks of Passenger Pigeons, then the most numerous birds on Earth, that could block out the sun? All that and far more gone.

12/johnjames.audubon.org/conservation/b…

These extinctions, and the reductions of once massive herds of animals, to just a remnant few, was generally driven, by either overhunting, or deliberate extermination, largely using firearms. The cause of these overkills, was clear.
13/

The whole problem with the "overkill hypothesis", is that it takes this mode of extermination/extinction, and it projects it back in time, and says, that is why the megafauna because extinct, because early humans over-hunted them. This is a preposterous falsehood and myth.
14/

The human population at the time humans first arrived in the Americas, Australia etc, was very small. It can't be known for certain, but it was likely thousands, tens of thousands, not many millions. What's more, they only had spears.
15/

The whole idea that merely thousands of people, armed only with spears, roamed around the vast Continents of the Americas and Australia, hunting down, every last animal of many species populations, until they were extinct, is beyond preposterous.
16/

The analogue, is clearly how, Bison (Buffalo), were wiped out, by European origin hunters with firearms. Firstly, Bison lived in a few vast herds, which facilitated the mass killings. And it was facilitated with firearms.
17/

This is not like over-hunting Woolly Mammoths, which didn't live in just a few vast herds, and which were distributed over vast areas, making finding them, let alone killing them, industrially, practically impossible.
18/

Also, sorry for the pun, but I must point out the elephant in the room with the "overkill hypothesis", which was based on the Clovis First hypothesis. That is the first humans in the Americas, were the manufacturers of the Clovis stone points, about 13,000 years ago.
19/

This neatly correlated with the disappearance of much of the American megafauna, in the next couple of thousand years.

The problem is, human footprints have now been found in N.America, that are 21-23,000 years old.

20/science.org/doi/10.1126/sc…

In other words, the whole correlation of humans arriving in the Americas, and then the megafauna extinction, which underpinned the "overkill hypothesis" is rubbish. But it still persists. It's a zombie argument.
21/

However, the period when this American megafauna became extinct, was a time of massive climate change, and environmental change, of the type that has driven megafauna extinctions, long before humans.

22/nature.com/articles/s4146…

So why invent the implausible, "overkill hypothesis", which is totally lacking in an evidential basis, when there was a far more plausible explanation for the disappearance of the disappearance of the N.American megafauna?
23/

I suggest there was a very obvious motivation for this preposterous hypothesis. Not only had European colonists self-evidently done massive damage to the biodiversity of N.America, but they committed genocide of the Native Americans.
24/

What a convenient diversionary argument. Blame Native Americans, for the megafauna extinction. Say they were just as bad as us, and didn't live sustainably, after all. Takes a bit of pressure off the genocide and land theft guilt, too. Real nasty stuff.
25/

I am not going to present the massive evidence and case I can wield against the "overkill hypothesis", because there is no evidence for this in the first place. The onus should be on those stating this, to provide evidence, not for me to disprove something, without evidence.
26/

Instead, I want to highlight, the whole fallacy, of it being claimed that early humans "caused" the megafauna extinction i.e. it being a direct, clear-cut causal reason. This supposed causal effect, is specious and sophistry.
27/

In the last 40 million years or so, many species of megafauna have become extinct, and most of this was well before the evolution of modern humans. So it happens, anyway, and no over-hunting hypothesis is necessary.
28/

These extinctions likely occurred because of climate change, and the resultant change in vegetation and habitat, that those species relied on. Once a decline trend sets in, with a species population, if that decline is not reversed, mathematics alone, leads to extinction.
29/

So why when we already know that there was massive environmental change in N.America due to climate and resultant habitat change, was it necessary to invent the implausible, "overkill hypothesis". More a case of cultural and racial, wishful thinking.
30/

When a species goes extinct over thousands of years, it is specious, sophistry and intellectually dishonest, to define that as happening due to a single cause. Because there are many causes.
31/

What is more, a cause for a decline, is not the same as the cause for extinction. Extinction, is often a matter of bad luck. A species that once has a very large population, can hang on, with a much smaller population.
32/

When a species falls to a small population, this can be seen in its genes, even if that population recovers, through a genetic bottleneck, when there was a period of low genetic diversity.

33/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Populatio…

Species that show evidence of population bottlenecks, include humans, and Woolly Mammoths. Yes, Woolly Mammoths, nearly became extinct on a number of occasions, including long before they could have encountered humans.

34/sciencedirect.com/science/articl…

When a species, falls to a small remnant population, it is a matter of luck, or bad luck, if it survives or goes extinct. A small population is vulnerable to extinction from a wide variety of causes. Such as disease, disasters, and only a small chance from hunting.
35/

Mammoths recovered from former small populations, when there was a further glaciation, and the habitat and climate they were best adapted to, returned. Same with many large animal populations, adapted to ice age conditions. There has been series of glacial periods.
36/

The reason hunting pressure was likely not such a big factor in remnant population extinctions, is that hunter-gatherer and natural predator populations, generally don't hunt rare prey. It's only modern human trophy hunters, who seek out rare prey.
37/

If you live by hunting, and face not living, by a lack of hunting success, you have not got the time to waste, pursuing rare prey. 2 ecological concepts that explain this, are "prey switching" and "optimal foraging". and
38/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Optimal_f…
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prey_swit…

In addition, a lot of the large mammals, megafauna, that went extinct, were not obvious prey species, and were large formidable predators, like the American Lion, American Cheetah, Dire Wolves, Short-faced Bears, Sabre-toothed Cats etc.
39/

It is far more likely that these predators became extinct, because of the climate change, and big changes in habitat, than over-hunting by humans. In fact, it's preposterous to assume a few thousand humans armed with spears hunted them to extinction.
40/

What all this means, is the hypothesis that a relatively small human population, armed only with spears, hunted all these species to extinction, in the manner 19th Century Americans shot Bison and Passenger Pigeons out of existence, is bizarre.
41/

As I say, there is no real basis for this "overkill hypothesis", no evidential basis for it and it is wishful thinking by those wanting to make excuses for the behaviour of their own culture.
42/

I'm not to bothered by the psychological analysis of why people propose dubious hypotheses, lacking in evidence, and which are incapable of being disproved or falsified. I AM BOTHERED BY THE FALSE IDEAS THIS FACILITATES.
43/

Where the clear evidence is that people are capable of living sustainably, of being mindful, of the limits of our natural systems, and the need not to over-exploit them. So it is possible for us to live sustainably.
44/

I am concerned that this realization is being totally undermined, by demonstrably false ideas, that humans are an innately destructive species, and this is the reason for the climate and ecological crisis. So it's all hopeless.
45/

The very clear evidence is that most of the environmental destruction leading to the climate and ecological crisis, is being driven by the very rich. Their wealth and profit, depends on burning fossil fuels, and over-exploitation of natural resources.

46/theguardian.com/us-news/2023/n…

This is not a crisis being driven by most people i.e. the whole human population, as the majority have low carbon emissions, and low levels of consumption, compared to the richest and most powerful in society. This is not a human problem, it is a very rich person problem.
47/

What is more, these very rich people, have massive control over our societies. As I illustrate here, literally a few thousand people, are the only individuals, who could take individual action, which would change everything.

48/threadreaderapp.com/thread/1776204…

It is an absolutely huge problem, that people, especially influential environmentalists and climate activists, repeat false ideas, that it is the fault of the human species. Citing the false "overkill hypothesis" to try and prove humans are innately destructive.
49/

This sends people's thinking off, in totally the wrong direction, thinking the situation is hopeless, because humans are innately destructive. So there's no point in trying to change anything, because the same thing will keep happening.
50/

As humans lived in a sustainable way, for most of our existence, and are inherently cooperative. That have an innate love of the natural systems, that sustain us. We don't have to find a new way of behaving. We simply have to throw off the control of a powerful few.
51/

People are being manipulated into behaving in a very destructive way, simply to make big profits for a relatively small group of very rich people, making massive profits from the processes driving the climate and ecological crisis.
52/

These people own the media, they have politicians in their pockets, they corrupt the whole of society with their wealth and power. They want people to believe, that they are all responsible for the climate and ecological crisis, because of their supposed greed.
53/

But the vast majority are not flying around in private jets, where the top 1% have greater carbon emissions, than 66% of humanity. The pattern painted is no greedy humans, but a small percentage of very greedy humans at the top, and with massive control over us.
54/

The way conmen work, is by making their victims, think it is their greed that caused them to fall victim to their con-tricks. The richest people in society, are con-artists, using and manipulating people. They don't actually own anything, that's part of their con.
55/

These people only have this control over us, as long as we believe the lies, and their con-tricks, to make us believe, we are responsible for our own downfall. To not see, how we're being played by manipulative con-artists. We're better than that.
56/

All these false ideas about humans being innately greedy and destructive, are spread by the same people profiting from these false beliefs. This is how con-artists operate. The biggest con-artists in society, are the richest and most powerful in our societies.
57/

Sorry, I can't open this up to responses. I am just fed up dealing with clever false arguments, of people who have been brainwashed and gaslighted by these rich and powerful con-artists.
58/

@threadreaderapp unroll